Part 0: Prologue/disclaimer
(written after living with the SF Line-1 for a few months).
I have to say that I like the Line-1; the bass problem has gone away after
running in the pre-amp and the tubes. (I am very sure that its not that
I've gotten use to the problem bass) Basically, I have traded a bit of
transparency for gains in soundstaging and imaging solidity. The thing
about the Line-1 is that it tries to be as neutral as possible and doesn't
try to beautify the sound (which in itself is not a bad thing actually).
So basically, you're paying at a $2k box that allows to switch between
CD and DVD players.

Perhaps thats why I'm hard
on pre-amps, and not only the Line-1 in particular. I will try very soon
to do a one on one against the similarly priced Nad S100 ($1.8k) downstairs.
Also, 1 more thing in the Line-1's favour is that it is fully balanced
and using balanced connectors does bring sonic improvements. I also fully
appreciate its wonderful ergonomics and remote control :)

Part
I: The Best Laid Plans

I was kind of planning to source
for my pre-amp maybe end of the year (check if any bonus besides 13th
month...) and anyway, I've been waiting for a long time to get one. At
any one time, Asia Sound usually has some stuff which its clearing. It
prints a little sheet with prices etc and sticks it up. Recently, I noticed
a handwritten scrawl right at the bottom of the sheet with the price of
the Line-1.

OK, more than $1,000/- less
than a Conrad Johnson PV-12? Hmmm... Of course, I checked to see if there
was any pre-amp on the market near to the Line-1 in terms of $$$. Oh look,
the Adcom pre-amp with the Nelson Pass design, also from Asia Sound. Of
coure, I had my heart set on a tube pre-amp so....

My Hi-Fi buying philosophy
(dictated by my finances) basically states that: buy good stuff cheap.
If it isn't cheap, and you don't need it. Wait, someday, it'll be on sale
(at latest, when they replace the model :)) So I've been driving my amp
direct from my CD player and everytime I want to watch a movie, I switch
the interconnects. I couldn't do this forever, so fortunately, this popped
up. Would the PV-12 be better? I've heard the PV-12 vs the Sonographe
pre-amp, and my rough guess would be: better, yes, but not by much

Part
II: Dragging it Home and Initial Impressions

Of course, tube pre-amps need
a lot of break in. Listening in on it breaking in, I wondered 'Oh no....
no wonder they're selling it so cheap' :) Conventional wisdom states 50
hours break in. I'm at slightly over 40 hours now, but really, even my
Amp took months to mature in terms of sound.

Initial Sound quality:
I had already known from others that the Line-1 is not considered 'transparent'.
Please ignore the rather bad Stereophile Reviews (if you read their review
on the Anthem Pre, Line-1, and then Line-2, you'll notice that the language
is all the same... they're all 'wonderful') However, this must be taken
into context. The Line-1 still costs more than my amp and my speaker (the
CD player is still the most expensive component) and so, I was pretty
confident of getting reasonable transparency.

The comments below are comparisons
between the pre-amp and driving direct. When I say 'more' or 'less' its
all relative. If I say its not transparent you might want to note
that other similarly priced pre-amps are probably about the same (save
passive ones).

Transparency
Of course, doing level matched A/B comparisons of driving the amp direct
vs through thepre-amp definitely showed that the Line-1 is not transparent
and also what fantastic sound I was getting driving direct (I would venture
to boast that the XA7ES driving the McCormack beats hands down any CD
player/pre/power combination costing less than $5k) Please note that all
the details are there. I can still hear the very quiet breathing in and
out in Mary Black's Shine at the intro. However, driving direct
someone reaches into the silence and pulls something out from it.

Admittedly, I was using a old
Nordost Blue Angel from pre-amp to amp, but I used both my XLO and Blue
Angel to drive the amp direct and the loss of transparency doesn't appear
to be caused by the cable (unless there is something unique about the
pre-amp to amp connection that I don't know about -- apparently some people
think there is)

ForwardnessDriving direct made
the sound forward, with an immediacy and sparkle about it. One listener
of my system thinks that its a bit 'in your face' with the singer a bit
too close (I listen 6.5 ft from speakers by the way). However, there is
a 'sparkle' which I relate to transparency of the system that gives it
life.

With the pre-amp, the vocals
and pushed back deeper into the soundstage, more in line with the other
instruments. This is fine, but the sound lost some of its 'sparkle' and
'space'. Objectively, you would say that treble extension is all there:
I don't hear it as rolled off.
It may be a tiny
bit smoother, but brightness remains the same. If the sound was rough
in driven direct, it was rough here as well. The more full-bodied sound
did not ameliorate the roughness. Which is actually good as it indicates
transparency at least in this regard.

But, there seemed something
missing in the 'life' department because the lost immediacy and transparency
(which perhaps provided great 'hi-fi' thrills, and hey, better than nothing),
was not replaced with the expected the next level of musicality... yet.

SoundstageSoundstaging definitely
improved. Images became more full bodied and the soundstage was bigger.

ImagingImaging remained
kind of the same. For the vocals, it could be said that the image, being
pushed back and not as forward, lost some of its specificity.

BassOK, if the Stereophile lab reports say that the pre-amp has a flat
frequency response, why am I getting more bass? The bass and midbass definitely
went up in volume. Fortunately, the bass is reasonably tight. However,
for some bass heavy CDs, I think the quantity is getting a bit too much.
I might have to consider getting some serious bass traps for the room
in the future.

SpeedSpeed remained essentially
unchanged.Maybe
a tiny bit slower.

Initial ConclusionsAs indicated, I've
traded away the sparkle and transparency and didn't appear to get much
in return. Wheres my increased musicality and harmonic richness??
And yeah, can I get some of my transparency back? Disclaimer: This
is of course after a very short break-in. I'll probably need to change
this after 100 hours+ of operation. But the main thrust is that you
will lose transparency moving from driving direct to a tube pre-amp. Also,
the general character of the pre-amp (compared to driving direct) as a
relatively neutral (read: relatively lean for a tube-amp with more bass
with good treble extension) should remain. Reviewers have pointed out
that running in more will provide greater openess and transparency. Note::
increased transparency from more running-in confirmed! Whew :)

Part
III: Bring out the Tweaks!

The pre-amp sits on the top
shelf of my Target D3 rack and the pre-amp comes with squishy feet. I
was planning to get a new interconnect first. Asia Sound offered to let
me try the Tara Reference Gen 2, and I was planning to take them up on
their offer after the pre-amp ran in.

But more importantly, (at least
in my belief system), isolation. And so, off I went to Soul of
Music to get 3 medium DH cones and 3 large DH cones. Spare DH squares
I have. Also, he handed me a pair of Diva interconnects (I keep telling
him... 1.5m is too long for my system and he tells me that T S Lim says
1.5m sounds better. He also hands me the Harmonic Technology Truth-Link
1m interconnects.

ConesI tried both the
medium and the large. I'm going with the medium under the squares. The
cones increased the air and spaciousness and thus made it a little more
transparent. No, still some way off from driving direct.Also, the pace and
rhythm tightened up a bit.

Wondering whether or not the
Cones could have an effect under the NAD preamp in the living room
on a Target B5 with castors (yes, the CJ MF2500 is being partnered with
a preamp that costs less than 1/10 the price of the power amp), the same
effects could be heard. However, I preferred the cheaper medium cones
as they made the bass a little more lean.

The DH squares were actually
pretty good. They do operate synergistically with the DH cones, much to
my surprise. I've tried them under Black Diamond cones but somehow theres
not much effect (no ill effect either). The squares made the high frequency
'air' less grainy and more seamless without loss of any HF detail.

A step in the right direction
then. The pre-amp was heading in the direction of 'listenable' :)

Am I going to compare them
to the Black Diamond Cones? Its too close.Both are fantastic buys
and instant improvements to almost any component. Improving a pre-amp.
Who would have thought it?

CableAs mentioned, I was
considering the Tara, and at the back of my mind was the Nordost Red Dawn
but I was worried that it might be a bit too bright. Anyway, the Harmonic
Technology Truth Link is the '2nd' from the top and the website says that
it is 'smooth'. Something like the Tara eh?

I slipped the HT into the system
and I was bowled over by the sound. Jaw-dropping would be appropriate
here as well.Of
course, one might take into account that the Blue Angel is not that great
a cable. Still, there was a tiny increase in detail and air, and more
important, the system suddenly turned musical. Trying to put my
finger on it, the cable makes the midrange more liquid and slightly more
full bodied without obscuring detail. Plowing through my CDs again, I
found that without exception, I preferred this wonderful sound.

But no matter how blown away
I was, I have to remember that what occurred in this case was probably
a classic 'cable mismatch' in the sense that the fast, detailed and spot
lit character of the Blue Angel overemphasised those qualities already
present in the Line-1. I still believe that a cable is only presenting
to you the qualities of the component it is connected to and that the
HT was a good match because it did not emphasis certain the things that
the Blue Angels did.

Conclusions for Part IIIWell, I've still
got loads of CDs to plow through and the pre-amp will still improve over
time. Still, I'm excited that the sound can only improve :) Wait till
I change the crappy power cord on the pre-amp. All in all, a good buy
for the money. Will update after thorough running in.

Part IV:
Further Running In - New Sonic Considerations

I'm sure there's more running
in to do, but this is yet another interim update.

To summarise quickly, whereas
earlier on the brightness/roughness attributed to the Blue Angel made
the sound rather intolerable, further running in has eased this brightness/roughness
and has made the Blue Angel listenable. This actually enables me to do
a more detailed comparison of the cables. In addition, I've plugged in
the Diva Fugue interconnects and am ready to do a comparison of
all 3.

Truth Link: As
mentioned above: liquid, liquid, liquid. Good air and detail at the top
end.

Blue Angel: The
Nordost attribute of fabulous focus is present and beats all the
other cables. There was greater speed and 'jump' (though admittedly, some
of it is caused by treble 'splash' - i.e. highlighted treble rather than
any greater resolution of inner detail) The central imaging is better
though admittedly 'painted' using a 'rougher' brush. The better Nordost
Cables should be able to do the painting with a finer brush.

Fugue:
This is a leaner cable with more in common with the Blue Angel (i.e.,
the Nordost/XLO etc vs the HT/Tara sound). I note that the focus was a
bit more diffuse but there was marvellous air and space around the image
and the best retrieval of soundstage ambience and information that
I've ever heard on my system. Listening to Mary Black's latest Speaking
with an Angel, I heard the gentle & subtle decay of her voice
into the background as well as loads of other soundstage cues. Perhaps
I could hear this better because of the cable's generally leaner nature
and good separation. On more demanding listening, I think there is a tiny
bit of roughness on the high frequencies (about the same as Blue Angel).
As for speed and pace, its close to the Blue Angel.

As stated above, I loved the
HT's ability to cure the harshness and to impart a liquid midrange. On
the other hand, I had to accept a slight loss of 'jump' and 'sparkle'
(as to whether this is 'natural' or 'artifcial' is not as important as
whether you like it) which is no big deal if the 'sparkle' is rough.

Anyway, the signs seem to point
towards continuing my affiliation with Nordost and to get a better grade
of Nordost. To be fair, I'm already using Blue Heaven speaker cables so
there is a question of system synergy here that may tilt the balance to
Nordost.

SSP bypass - Transparency
Test The Line-1 provides
a surround sound processor bypass feature that connects the inputs direct
to the outputs bypassing everything (including/especially the tubes).
This gave me an opportunity to run the XA7ES using variable outputs through
the SSP and comparing it with the variable outputs (set to max) through
a normal input and going through the normal
inputs.

Through the SSP, the speakers
were dead silent from my listening position which confirms that the tubes
are not in the circuit. Through the normal input, there is an ever so
slight hiss typical of tube equipment. A comparison will therefore tell
us how transparent the onboard circuitry is. Fortunately, I have to say
that the losses were extremely slight. But the addition of losses
from the RCA connections etc I suppose add up to some audible losses.
But thanks to running in not as much before. The Line-1 is pretty transparent.

Conclusions for Part IV:Hey, the sound is
getting pretty good now. The sound is less rough and so I have more cable
options available. I still have to decide my final interconnect and maybe
start thinking about power cord....